This collection of essays engages with the current resurgence of interest in the relationship between American pragmatism and communication studies. The topics engaged in this collection of essays is necessarily diverse, with some of the figures discussed within often viewed as "minor" or ancillary to the main tradition of pragmatism. However, each essay attempts to show the value of reading these minor figures for philosophy and rhetorical studies. The diversity of the pragmatist tradition is evident in the ways in which unlikely figures like Hu Shi, Ambedkar, and Alice Dewey leverage some of the original commitments of pragmatism to do important intellectual, social, and political work within the circumstances that they find themselves. This collection of essays also serves as a reminder for how we might reimagine and reuse pragmatism for our own social and political projects and challenges.

Building a Social Democracy offers an alternative intellectual history of American pragmatism, one that tries to reclaim the middle of the twentieth century in order to push neo-pragmatism beyond its philosophical limitations. Danisch argues that the major entailment of the invention of American pragmatism at the beginning of the twentieth century is that rhetorical practices are the rightful object of study and means of improving democratic life. Pragmatism entails a commitment to rhetoric. Rhetorical pragmatism is intended to be more faithful to the project of first generation pragmatism, to offer insight into the ways in which rhetoric operates in contemporary democratic cultures, to recommend practices, methods, and modes of action for improving contemporary democratic cultures, and to subordinate philosophy to rhetoric by reimagining appropriate ways for pragmatist scholarship and social research to advance.

If you feel like the world has gone to hell in a handbasket, you’re not alone. If you often feel there’s nothing you can do about it, you’re also not alone. Along with this increasing anger, fear, and frustration, much confusion still prevails on the appropriate communication practices for responding to difficult situations and improving our lives. Communication experts, Robert Danisch and William Keith, explain why and how we can practice radical civility in this practical guide to everyday “political” communication. This guide begins with examples of radical civility to show the potential of this kind of communication to change minds and bridge differences. The authors then unpack the three foundational principles of radical civility as useful theoretical tools for thinking throughout interactions with others in civic spaces. This is then followed by a three-step process for practicing radical civility drawing on research into active listening and its importance for creating connections, validating other views, and opening up possibilities for future conversation. The guide concludes with evidence-based communication practices and prescriptive recommendations for how to do each and show examples of each in action. Radically Civil: Saving Democracy One Conversation at a Time is a much-needed communication-based antidote to polarization, preparing students, researchers, and community leaders to be responsible participants in today’s society.

From the pundits to the polls, nearly everyone seems to agree that US politics have rarely been more fractious, and calls for a return to “civil discourse” abound. Yet it is also true that the requirements of polite discourse effectively silence those who are not in power, gaming the system against the disenfranchised. What, then, should a democracy do? This book makes a case for understanding civility in a different light. Examining the history of the concept and its basis in communication and political theory, William Keith and Robert Danisch present a clear, robust analysis of civil discourse. Distinguishing it from politeness, they claim that civil argument must be redirected from the goal of political comity to that of building and maintaining relationships of minimal respect in the public sphere. They also take into account how civility enables discrimination, indicating conditions under which uncivil resistance is called for. When viewed as a communication practice for uniting people with differences and making them more equal, civility is transformed from a preferable way of speaking into an essential component of democratic life. Guarding against uncritical endorsement of civility as well as skepticism, Keith and Danisch show with rigor, nuance, and care that the practice of civil communication is both paradoxical and sorely needed. Beyond Civility is necessary reading for our times.

Taken as a whole, this book argues that the very idea of what it means to be a "citizen" in our global, cosmopolitan world is no longer as clear as it may have been for an Athenian democrat of the fifth century BC, a Roman Republican of the first century BC, a British coloniser of the eighteenth century, or an American patriot of the nineteenth century. Given the now undeniable fact of pluralism highlighted by globalisation and the massive movement of peoples across borders (alongside the legal expansion of rights to minority groups in Western democracies throughout the twentieth century), the idea of citizenship now immediately implicates the problem of inclusion. Pluralism and migration also make identity an increasingly fragile and important concept that is only loosely tethered to the meaning of citizenship. This book shows that the very idea of what it means to be a citizen of a state was complex and uncertain. And that the concept of citizenship was being actively rethought from the different disciplines represented at the conference: sociology, anthropology, literary studies, communication studies, and political science to name a few.

From the pundits to the polls, nearly everyone seems to agree that US politics have rarely been more fractious, and calls for a return to "civil discourse" abound. Yet it is also true that the requirements of polite discourse effectively silence those who are not in power, gaming the system against the disenfranchised. What, then, should a democracy do? This book makes a case for understanding civility in a different light. Examining the history of the concept and its basis in communication and political theory, William Keith and Robert Danisch present a clear, robust analysis of civil discourse. Distinguishing it from politeness, they claim that civil argument must be redirected from the goal of political comity to that of building and maintaining relationships of minimal respect in the public sphere. They also take into account how civility enables discrimination, indicating conditions under which uncivil resistance is called for. When viewed as a communication practice for uniting people with differences and making them more equal, civility is transformed from a preferable way of speaking into an essential component of democratic life. Guarding against uncritical endorsement of civility as well as skepticism, Keith and Danisch show with rigor, nuance, and care that the practice of civil communication is both paradoxical and sorely needed. Beyond Civility is necessary reading for our times.